Remember me
▼ Content

East Antarctic Ice Shelf Weaknesses



Page 3 of 3<123
03-02-2017 19:20
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1458)
Wake wrote:
That's a perfectly reasonable question, but first I'd like to find out WTF Wake is going on about when he/she claims that the Earth is gaining both land and water. You got any idea?


So information from satellite surveys is MY claim? Showing that where sea levels have risen the most the islands, by actual measure, have grown is MY claim?

Why are you quaking in fear and asking me to hold your hand instead of looking it up yourself? Is this the sort of scientist you are?

This actually most important because you demonstrate that the Global Warmies are nothing more than a pack of sheep with nothing more behind them than a political agenda. You don't even know who the flock herder is.

Here's a clue - he has made almost a trillion dollars crashing the economies of half the world.

You made the specific claim that:

Earth's surface gained 115,000 km2 of water and 173,000 km2 of land over the past 30 years, including 20,135 km2 of water and 33,700 km2 of land in coastal areas.

Now, forgive me for stating the obvious, but the Earth's surface cannot possibly gain both land and water. The area of the Earth's surface is fixed. Any gain in land area must equal a loss in water area and vice versa.

So what were you trying to say? If you are unable to express coherently whatever point you're trying to make, how about giving a link to the site where you found those numbers so that we can see for ourselves what was meant?
03-02-2017 20:17
Tim the plumber
★★★☆☆
(866)
Wake wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
thaw wrote:
It's easy to rebuild London after the blitz. Your q was about cost and you can read that again.
" 970,000 homes in the 2020s, £2.2bn a year,
"A National Assessment of Flood Risk", UK Environmental Agency, 2009 said a sixth of UK homes are at risk of flooding.


So for the third time,

3 days ago I said;

Please link to a property on google maps and we can look at how easy it would be to protect.




You have avoided doing that because you know that we will look at it and see that it will be very easy to protect from the worste case scenario of sea level rise.


Let us talk about a specific place and see exactly what would be needed to protect against sea level rise.

The flooding in the UK has nothing to do with sea level rise. The buildings you are talking about in that report are almost all inland.

Try to stay on topic.


The greater part of Holland is below Sea Level and has been for over 100 years. The highest point in Holland is only 1000 feet or so. Will they disappear beneath the waves in rising sea levels? Of course not, they already have sea walls in place and need only extend them in the worst possible scenario.


Yep, it is always the same, when you want to look at an actual testable situation they spew forth any number of macro level reports because the scripture they follow trumps the real world.

I never got an answer to the demand to look at a particular property.
03-02-2017 22:21
Wake
★★★★☆
(1195)
If you look at this chart: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ you will notice an extremely rapid arctic ice sheet recovery. It must be that climate change thingy.

Meanwhile the Antarctic has been plugging along without any problems. Nobody informed that continent that there's global warming and it should be melting away.

https://neptune.gsfc.nasa.gov/csb/index.php?section=234

Or we could listen to one of the warmies here who is proclaiming that the "east Antarctic Ice Sheet is melting:

Actually it is the west Antarctic (but who is criticizing a slight slip) - and this is melting because of a volcano that has actually grown now to the point where it is sticking out of the ice sheet. According to the warmies lava is powerless against ice.
03-02-2017 22:35
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1458)
Wake wrote:
If you look at this chart: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ you will notice an extremely rapid arctic ice sheet recovery. It must be that climate change thingy.

You must have your reading glasses on upside-down again. Arctic ice extent is at a record low for the time of year.
05-02-2017 00:52
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
Satellite pictures of the increasing Larsen C, Antarctic ice crack:
http://m.esa.int/spaceinimages/Images/2017/01/Larsen_crack
05-02-2017 19:16
Tim the plumber
★★★☆☆
(866)
litesong wrote:
Satellite pictures of the increasing Larsen C, Antarctic ice crack:
http://m.esa.int/spaceinimages/Images/2017/01/Larsen_crack


Do you think that this has anything to do with the temperature in that region?
05-02-2017 21:37
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" puffed: Do you think that this has anything to do with the temperature in that region?


4000 to 10,000+ year old Ice Shelves, Wilkinson, Ward Hunt, Larsen A, Larsen B, (others) busted up from the 1990's to 2000's period. All this bustin' up during decades long lethargic solar TSI, & low solar TSI (including a 3+ year TSI low setting a 100 year record). So we know low solar energy ain't bustin' dem up.
Meanwhile, 386+ straight months of global Earth temperatures have been above the 20th century average, first decade of the 21st century was the warmest decade of all recorded temperatures, the last five year period has been the warmest 5 year period of all recorded temperatures, & the last 3 full years have successively been the warmest of all years recorded.
Edited on 05-02-2017 21:39
06-02-2017 00:13
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
litesong wrote: Satellite pictures of the increasing Larsen C, Antarctic ice crack:
http://m.esa.int/spaceinimages/Images/2017/01/Larsen_crack

Not an ice crack, but here's a...."desert" crack:
http://www.livescience.com/57663-giant-crack-opens-in-arizona-desert.html
06-02-2017 16:57
Wake
★★★★☆
(1195)
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' AGW denier liar whiner tipped the leaky plunger" puffed: Do you think that this has anything to do with the temperature in that region?


4000 to 10,000+ year old Ice Shelves, Wilkinson, Ward Hunt, Larsen A, Larsen B, (others) busted up from the 1990's to 2000's period. All this bustin' up during decades long lethargic solar TSI, & low solar TSI (including a 3+ year TSI low setting a 100 year record). So we know low solar energy ain't bustin' dem up.
Meanwhile, 386+ straight months of global Earth temperatures have been above the 20th century average, first decade of the 21st century was the warmest decade of all recorded temperatures, the last five year period has been the warmest 5 year period of all recorded temperatures, & the last 3 full years have successively been the warmest of all years recorded.


Give us some more of that scientific American Indian magic. The CRACK is in the surface of the Glacier ice sheet that has pushed out over ocean level and has been floating there until it NATURALLY breaks off as the end of ALL glaciers do.

I love the way morons will fight to remain morons.
07-02-2017 19:31
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" woofs: The CRACK is in the surface of the Glacier ice sheet that has pushed out over ocean level and has been floating there until it NATURALLY breaks off as the end of ALL glaciers do.

"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" believes that 4000 to 10,000 year old Ward Hunt, Wilkerson, Larsen A, Larsen B, & now Larsen C(others?), are intact for as much as 10,000+ years with no problems, BBBUUUTTTTTT, now believes that they are bustin' up within a score of years.... all naturally. All natural, specially with the solar radiation TSI being languid for decades, & for 10 years, below normal (including a 3+ year period setting a 100 year record low).
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" earns its name.
Edited on 07-02-2017 19:34
08-02-2017 21:55
Wake
★★★★☆
(1195)
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
If you look at this chart: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ you will notice an extremely rapid arctic ice sheet recovery. It must be that climate change thingy.

You must have your reading glasses on upside-down again. Arctic ice extent is at a record low for the time of year.


Can you explain why you are too stupid to actually read a chart? While the ice sheet was at about 50% below it's NORMAL lowest extent it has recovered to about the lowest natural extent.

Why can't you read that? Is it your eyes or your brain that is failing you?
08-02-2017 22:03
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1458)
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
If you look at this chart: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ you will notice an extremely rapid arctic ice sheet recovery. It must be that climate change thingy.

You must have your reading glasses on upside-down again. Arctic ice extent is at a record low for the time of year.


Can you explain why you are too stupid to actually read a chart? While the ice sheet was at about 50% below it's NORMAL lowest extent it has recovered to about the lowest natural extent.

Why can't you read that? Is it your eyes or your brain that is failing you?

The Arctic ice extent remains at a record low for the time of year. We have never previously recorded less Arctic ice at this time of year. How the hell can that be considered to be an extremely rapid recovery? There has been no recovery. The trend remains downwards.
09-02-2017 01:55
Into the Night
★★★★★
(2646)
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
If you look at this chart: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ you will notice an extremely rapid arctic ice sheet recovery. It must be that climate change thingy.

You must have your reading glasses on upside-down again. Arctic ice extent is at a record low for the time of year.


Can you explain why you are too stupid to actually read a chart? While the ice sheet was at about 50% below it's NORMAL lowest extent it has recovered to about the lowest natural extent.

Why can't you read that? Is it your eyes or your brain that is failing you?

The Arctic ice extent remains at a record low for the time of year. We have never previously recorded less Arctic ice at this time of year. How the hell can that be considered to be an extremely rapid recovery? There has been no recovery. The trend remains downwards.

The trend? What trend? Your 'trend' is nothing more than comparing two instances of ice content. That's like saying the 'trend is permanent night because the light is failing'.

You really ought to understand what a 'trend' actually is.

That said, there is more ice in the arctic cap this year than last year. There is also NO connection to any kind of global temperature since the Antarctic doesn't seem to want to cooperate. This could easily be the result of volcanic activity under the Arctic ice cap. There IS a range of active volcanoes under there.

Did you know you can't measure or calculate a global temperature to any kind of useful accuracy with the instrumentation we have?


The Parrot Killer
09-02-2017 03:13
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: there is more ice in the arctic cap this year than last year.

"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" lies, it knows it lies, & wants to lie, because it has been corrected numerous times.
February 1, 2017 Arctic sea ice VOLUME was ~ 2500 cubic kilometers less than to date February1, 2016. As a TREND, February 1, 2017 Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 10,600 cubic kilometers LESS than the average February 1, year sea ice VOLUME of the 1980's.
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" earns its name.
Edited on 09-02-2017 03:56
09-02-2017 04:27
Wake
★★★★☆
(1195)
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
If you look at this chart: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ you will notice an extremely rapid arctic ice sheet recovery. It must be that climate change thingy.

You must have your reading glasses on upside-down again. Arctic ice extent is at a record low for the time of year.


Can you explain why you are too stupid to actually read a chart? While the ice sheet was at about 50% below it's NORMAL lowest extent it has recovered to about the lowest natural extent.

Why can't you read that? Is it your eyes or your brain that is failing you?

The Arctic ice extent remains at a record low for the time of year. We have never previously recorded less Arctic ice at this time of year. How the hell can that be considered to be an extremely rapid recovery? There has been no recovery. The trend remains downwards.


OK, explain to me what you THINK that Arctic Ice sheet is.
09-02-2017 10:07
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
Wake wrote: explain to me..... that Arctic Ice sheet...

What I said to "badnight", I'll say to you.
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" lies, it knows it lies, & wants to lie, because it has been corrected numerous times.
February 1, 2017 Arctic sea ice VOLUME was ~ 2500 cubic kilometers less than to date February1, 2016. As a TREND, February 1, 2017 Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 10,600 cubic kilometers LESS than the average February 1, year sea ice VOLUME of the 1980's.
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" earns its name.
09-02-2017 10:48
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1458)
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
If you look at this chart: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ you will notice an extremely rapid arctic ice sheet recovery. It must be that climate change thingy.

You must have your reading glasses on upside-down again. Arctic ice extent is at a record low for the time of year.


Can you explain why you are too stupid to actually read a chart? While the ice sheet was at about 50% below it's NORMAL lowest extent it has recovered to about the lowest natural extent.

Why can't you read that? Is it your eyes or your brain that is failing you?

The Arctic ice extent remains at a record low for the time of year. We have never previously recorded less Arctic ice at this time of year. How the hell can that be considered to be an extremely rapid recovery? There has been no recovery. The trend remains downwards.


OK, explain to me what you THINK that Arctic Ice sheet is.

The graph on the page you referenced shows the Arctic sea ice extent, that is, the area of ocean with at least 15% sea ice. Every year this extent rises and falls with the seasons, reaching a maximum in spring and a minimum in the fall (autumn). You can see that the sea ice extent has been very low throughout this year, remaining well below the 1981 - 2010 average. This continues the trend of diminishing Arctic sea ice extent maxima and minima that has continued for the last few decades.
09-02-2017 20:18
Wake
★★★★☆
(1195)
Tim the plumber wrote:
litesong wrote:
Satellite pictures of the increasing Larsen C, Antarctic ice crack:
http://m.esa.int/spaceinimages/Images/2017/01/Larsen_crack


Do you think that this has anything to do with the temperature in that region?


Whoever would have guessed that when a glacier that is freshwater flows out over a salt water ocean that has a much lower freezing point that the reactions between the two would lead to the breaking up of the freshwater flows? Utterly impossible I tell you. Or rather Chief Crazy Horse does.
09-02-2017 22:27
Into the Night
★★★★★
(2646)
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
If you look at this chart: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ you will notice an extremely rapid arctic ice sheet recovery. It must be that climate change thingy.

You must have your reading glasses on upside-down again. Arctic ice extent is at a record low for the time of year.


Can you explain why you are too stupid to actually read a chart? While the ice sheet was at about 50% below it's NORMAL lowest extent it has recovered to about the lowest natural extent.

No it doesn't. Your 'trend' is only a downward 'trend' because you are comparing it to selected years.

Why can't you read that? Is it your eyes or your brain that is failing you?

The Arctic ice extent remains at a record low for the time of year. We have never previously recorded less Arctic ice at this time of year. How the hell can that be considered to be an extremely rapid recovery? There has been no recovery. The trend remains downwards.


OK, explain to me what you THINK that Arctic Ice sheet is.

The graph on the page you referenced shows the Arctic sea ice extent, that is, the area of ocean with at least 15% sea ice. Every year this extent rises and falls with the seasons, reaching a maximum in spring and a minimum in the fall (autumn). You can see that the sea ice extent has been very low throughout this year, remaining well below the 1981 - 2010 average. This continues the trend of diminishing Arctic sea ice extent maxima and minima that has continued for the last few decades.



The Parrot Killer
09-02-2017 22:29
Into the Night
★★★★★
(2646)
litesong wrote:
Wake wrote: explain to me..... that Arctic Ice sheet...

What I said to "badnight", I'll say to you.
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" lies, it knows it lies, & wants to lie, because it has been corrected numerous times.
February 1, 2017 Arctic sea ice VOLUME was ~ 2500 cubic kilometers less than to date February1, 2016. As a TREND, February 1, 2017 Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 10,600 cubic kilometers LESS than the average February 1, year sea ice VOLUME of the 1980's.
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" earns its name.


You don't know the volume of Arctic sea ice. No measurement is taken of it.


The Parrot Killer
10-02-2017 01:30
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" barfed: You don't know the volume of Arctic sea ice. No measurement is taken of it.

It is good to see "old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" admitting its inability to determine Arctic sea ice VOLUME. It is good to see the ego of "old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" determine that if it can't determine Arctic sea ice VOLUME, then no one else can, either.
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" earns its name.
10-02-2017 23:24
Wake
★★★★☆
(1195)
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
If you look at this chart: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ you will notice an extremely rapid arctic ice sheet recovery. It must be that climate change thingy.

You must have your reading glasses on upside-down again. Arctic ice extent is at a record low for the time of year.


Can you explain why you are too stupid to actually read a chart? While the ice sheet was at about 50% below it's NORMAL lowest extent it has recovered to about the lowest natural extent.

Why can't you read that? Is it your eyes or your brain that is failing you?

The Arctic ice extent remains at a record low for the time of year. We have never previously recorded less Arctic ice at this time of year. How the hell can that be considered to be an extremely rapid recovery? There has been no recovery. The trend remains downwards.


OK, explain to me what you THINK that Arctic Ice sheet is.

The graph on the page you referenced shows the Arctic sea ice extent, that is, the area of ocean with at least 15% sea ice. Every year this extent rises and falls with the seasons, reaching a maximum in spring and a minimum in the fall (autumn). You can see that the sea ice extent has been very low throughout this year, remaining well below the 1981 - 2010 average. This continues the trend of diminishing Arctic sea ice extent maxima and minima that has continued for the last few decades.


We appear to have lost the subject here.

1. The manner in which the ocean's level can rise is exactly as I said before - the glacial rebound lifts the land and the decrease in mass density changes the center of gravity of the Earth towards the deep ocean trenches. So the land rises AND the water surface increases. In short the water level AND the land levels increase making the Earth fractionally larger in diameter. This has a limit in which this can occur but the warm period will probably end before that point is reached.

2. "climate scientist" in another string was attempting to address the causes of Arctic melting and how the ice sheet is only shifting, that was misunderstood by the anti-warmies who were attacked by people like you who didn't understand what he was saying either. Our Northwest Passage is now more ice free than normal and the Russian coastline is more ice sheet than normal.

Perhaps if you weren't dead set on simply attacking anyone whom you consider to have an opposite political position than yours you might learn something but I doubt it.

A "rapid recovery showed a low of 20% below NORMAL LOWs to a high at the normal low boundaries. If you DO NOT understand that we're back at your 10^10th.
11-02-2017 00:10
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1458)
Wake wrote:
1. The manner in which the ocean's level can rise is exactly as I said before - the glacial rebound lifts the land and the decrease in mass density changes the center of gravity of the Earth towards the deep ocean trenches. So the land rises AND the water surface increases. In short the water level AND the land levels increase making the Earth fractionally larger in diameter. This has a limit in which this can occur but the warm period will probably end before that point is reached.

This simply makes no sense. The centre of gravity of the Earth cannot "change towards the deep ocean trenches". The Earth, or indeed any body, has only one centre of gravity; in the case of a sphere, the centre of gravity is at its geometric centre. There are many deep ocean trenches scatted around the world. How could the Earth's centre of gravity change towards all of them?
11-02-2017 01:43
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
[b]Surface Detail wrote: There are many deep ocean trenches scatted around the world.

If animals haven't filled them yet, I doubt if they will ever fill them.

Edited on 11-02-2017 01:45
12-02-2017 00:59
Wake
★★★★☆
(1195)
[b]Surface Detail wrote:
This simply makes no sense. The centre of gravity of the Earth cannot "change towards the deep ocean trenches". The Earth, or indeed any body, has only one centre of gravity; in the case of a sphere, the centre of gravity is at its geometric centre. There are many deep ocean trenches scatted around the world. How could the Earth's centre of gravity change towards all of them?


OK, you can't make any sense out of that. We understand.
12-02-2017 04:00
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
Wake wrote:
[b]Surface Detail wrote:
This simply makes no sense. The centre of gravity of the Earth cannot "change towards the deep ocean trenches". The Earth, or indeed any body, has only one centre of gravity; in the case of a sphere, the centre of gravity is at its geometric centre. There are many deep ocean trenches scatted around the world. How could the Earth's centre of gravity change towards all of them?

OK, you can't make any sense out of that. We understand.

Ah.....its good to hear confirmation from AGW denier liar whiners that AGW denier liar whiners make no sense.
15-02-2017 02:47
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
Must be a particularly hot February 14, 2017 Valentine's Day......
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/14/antarctic-sea-ice-shrinks-to-smallest-ever-extent
15-02-2017 02:58
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(464)
I read the article....scare tactics and please send money. Classic BS.
15-02-2017 03:41
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(464)
Some quick facts Vostok

The lowest reliably measured temperature on Earth of −89.2 °C (−128.6 °F) was in Vostok on 21 July 1983

The coldest wind chill was −124 °C (−191 °F) on 24 August 2005 with a real temperature of −74 °C (−101 °F).

Though unconfirmed, it has been reported that Vostok reached the temperature of −91 °C (−132 °F) on 28 July 1997.[19]

The warmest recorded temperature at Vostok is −14.0 °C (6.8 °F), which occurred on 5 January 1974

The coldest month was August 1987 with a mean temperature of −75.4 °C (−103.7 °F)

the warmest month was December 1989 with mean of −28 °C (−18 °F)



Well, that should should put that theory in the freezer.
Edited on 15-02-2017 04:13
15-02-2017 04:29
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner gaslighter" guffed: the warmest month was December 1989 with mean of −28 °C (−18 °F)

Warmest year at South Pole was 2009.
http://www.livescience.com/8220-south-pole-warmest-year-record.html
Warmest day in Antarctica was in 2015:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/03/150331-antarctica-hottest-temperature-climate-change-global-warming-science/
Edited on 15-02-2017 04:40
15-02-2017 20:52
Wake
★★★★☆
(1195)
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Wake wrote:
If you look at this chart: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ you will notice an extremely rapid arctic ice sheet recovery. It must be that climate change thingy.

You must have your reading glasses on upside-down again. Arctic ice extent is at a record low for the time of year.


Can you explain why you are too stupid to actually read a chart? While the ice sheet was at about 50% below it's NORMAL lowest extent it has recovered to about the lowest natural extent.

Why can't you read that? Is it your eyes or your brain that is failing you?

The Arctic ice extent remains at a record low for the time of year. We have never previously recorded less Arctic ice at this time of year. How the hell can that be considered to be an extremely rapid recovery? There has been no recovery. The trend remains downwards.


Why do you continue? The chart SHOWS that it isn't "at record low levels". It is at the lowest levels previously recorded. That is why the chart is marked as it is.

Is it low? Certainly - we had a record warm year. But the recovery was very fast suggesting that this was nothing more than a weather event and not climate change.
15-02-2017 21:42
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" woofs:
The Arctic ice extent.... isn't "at record low levels"..... the recovery was very fast suggesting that this was nothing more than a weather event...


February 1, 2017 Arctic sea ice VOLUME was ~ 2500 cubic kilometers less than to date February 1, 2016. As a TREND, February 1, 2017 Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 10,600 cubic kilometers LESS than the average February 1, year sea ice VOLUME of the 1980's. Ain't weather, as "wake-me-up" lies.
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" earns its name.
I repeat this science & "wake-me-up" continues to deny, lie & whine..... because it is, "old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" & named very accurately.
16-02-2017 17:31
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
Global sea ice continues lower than normal, but not as wildly divergent as in latter 2016:
https://14adebb0-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/sea-ice-extent-area/grf/nsidc_global_extent_byyear_b.png?attachauth=ANoY7cqB1WvnPqmbpUNoB6YHNbGm-NAdpW9pGD46PUR5o6jpk7d_PQCuLaXSaFXAbXuH2ytQQEwAQX2sKDQ5FmB9b2jkd9zXQx0kvtfobbDiQAgmcx3sanQAz452Ok-lWeG9QnT8gNQGedr42xTjH-IEc-Sf9DgKwcYICCUYJ-u4K5oEVaek0ssUcFzSvaLUKNNhbKAV5F-JP95kAY93HpkLDoZED9WyhZAwBhTNlNsayPYdrazE8wfqw84ZLhryc8UcOAYhbxs66_aAilb8DYjllweb0f_zdEMOjDx1feB97CRRwRwKnqY%3D&attredirects=0
25-02-2017 21:49
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" woofs:
The Arctic ice extent.... isn't "at record low levels"..... the recovery was very fast suggesting that this was nothing more than a weather event...


February 1, 2017 Arctic sea ice VOLUME was ~ 2500 cubic kilometers less than to date February 1, 2016. As a TREND, February 1, 2017 Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 10,600 cubic kilometers LESS than the average February 1, year sea ice VOLUME of the 1980's. Ain't weather, as "wake-me-up" lies.
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" earns its name.
I repeat this science & "wake-me-up" continues to deny, lie & whine..... because it is, "old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner wake-me-up" & named very accurately.

Adding to:
New & old data is nice:
For 386+ STRAIGHT months, global Earth temperatures have been above the 20th century average. This has occurred DESPITE the solar TSI energy output being languid for decades, & below normal for 10 years (including a 3+ year period of low solar TSI energy setting a 100 year low). When the sun returns to normal (& it will because it has INCREASED very slowly for 5 billion years), AGW effects will increase strongly. In late 2016, the Present High Arctic Berserker, or PHAB, or FAB ( over- temperatures on nearly 4 million square kilometers of the High Arctic), jumped to 20degC over-temperature. MIND YOU!! This is NOT a local city temperature over say a 20 kilometer by 20 kilometer square. It is over a square almost 2000 kilometers by 2000 kilometers. Within the last 2 years in the MIDDLE OF WINTER, our Earth's North Pole heated above the freezing point of water for short times, on three occasions.
Repeating & adding to: presently, Arctic sea ice VOLUME is 10,600 cubic kilometers LESS than the to date Arctic sea ice average year for the 1980's. The energy to melt such a cube of ice (almost 22 kilometers by 22 kilometers by 65000 feet high) is about 33 times the annual energy used by the United States of America. Lesser ice losses are occurring in the Antarctic (but increasing).
03-03-2017 03:28
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
Tho some points of East Antarctica are ~ (-50+)degC. (-60+degF.) in this the Antarctic latter summer, other large regions of East Antarctica are as much as 20degC. over-average temperatures.
Edited on 03-03-2017 03:32
19-03-2017 16:51
litesong
★★★★☆
(1080)
litesong wrote:
Global sea ice continues lower than normal, but not as wildly divergent as in latter 2016:
https://14adebb0-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/sea-ice-extent-area/grf/nsidc_global_extent_byyear_b.png?attachauth=ANoY7cqB1WvnPqmbpUNoB6YHNbGm-NAdpW9pGD46PUR5o6jpk7d_PQCuLaXSaFXAbXuH2ytQQEwAQX2sKDQ5FmB9b2jkd9zXQx0kvtfobbDiQAgmcx3sanQAz452Ok-lWeG9QnT8gNQGedr42xTjH-IEc-Sf9DgKwcYICCUYJ-u4K5oEVaek0ssUcFzSvaLUKNNhbKAV5F-JP95kAY93HpkLDoZED9WyhZAwBhTNlNsayPYdrazE8wfqw84ZLhryc8UcOAYhbxs66_aAilb8DYjllweb0f_zdEMOjDx1feB97CRRwRwKnqY%3D&attredirects=0


Present to date Global sea ice extent is ~ 3 million square kilometers LESS than to date average from early 1980's.
Page 3 of 3<123





Join the debate East Antarctic Ice Shelf Weaknesses:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Fast recovery of thick Arctic ice4026-06-2017 00:28
Ice Ages112-06-2017 21:35
Arctic ice still rapidly decreasing9308-06-2017 02:19
Arctic ice falls to record winter low after polar 'heatwaves'1004-04-2017 12:39
Ice Ages322-03-2017 20:13
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Will Arctic summers be ice-free in this century?

Yes

No

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2017 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact